Anyone still not getting the 950 XL firmware update?

Different regions have different firmware. It looks so far that all the ones receiving updates are in Europe, could be wrong but have seen no reports of a US dual/single SIM, unlocked/ATT phone receiving it yet.

But the carriers didn't have any say at all in the creation and sale of the phone. MS built it to industry standards, then sold it directly to end users who then use it on whatever network they want. Why all of the sudden are the carriers in charge?

I call pure BS here.

People are getting confused here. Phones sold directly from Microsoft as 'SIM-free' will get updated without carrier involvement (including firmware). Phones sold through the carrier will likely only get Firmware updates once the carrier has tested and approved them.

On top of that, the current firmware update appears to be rolling out in a phased manner - likely by region, and then IMEI number so even if you have a 'sim free' phone you may STILL be waiting for the firmware because:

1. Your region (where the phone was distributed by MS/sold NOT where it physically is) isn't being rolled out yet (US, for example).

2. Your region is not being rolled out yet, but your IMEI is further down the list.

People are getting confused here. Phones sold directly from Microsoft as 'SIM-free' will get updated without carrier involvement (including firmware). Phones sold through the carrier will likely only get Firmware updates once the carrier has tested and approved them.

On top of that, the current firmware update appears to be rolling out in a phased manner - likely by region, and then IMEI number so even if you have a 'sim free' phone you may STILL be waiting for the firmware because:

1. Your region (where the phone was distributed by MS/sold, NOT where it physically is now) isn't being rolled out yet (US, for example).

2. Your region is not being rolled out yet, but your IMEI is further down the list.

All the changes to software related to antenna need carrier approval, even if you don't like it.

Did they need carrier approval to be created in the first place? Or did MS simply create a phone to standards, sell it unlocked in their store, and let the users plug in whatever SIM they wanted and get whatever the carriers chose to give? For example, no LTE on AT&T, no band 12 or visual voicemail or wifi calling on T-Mobile, etc.

They created a phone to standards, without carrier involvement. Tell us again why carriers suddenly "need to be involved".

Did they need carrier approval to be created in the first place? Or did MS simply create a phone to standards, sell it unlocked in their store, and let the users plug in whatever SIM they wanted and get whatever the carriers chose to give? For example, no LTE on AT&T, no band 12 or visual voicemail or wifi calling on T-Mobile, etc.

They created a phone to standards, without carrier involvement. Tell us again why carriers suddenly "need to be involved".

A phone locked to AT&T, for example, only need the AT&T approval because it is an AT&T phone, the firmware is tested by ATT and it is supposed that it will use an AT&T SIM. An unlocked phone can use a SIM from several carriers and the firmware need the approval from the carriers from that country, because it can use a SIM from that carriers, that's the reason why unlocked phones are the latest receiving firmware updates, even on WP8.0 and 8.1.

the phone was created, and its firmware was created, originally WITHOUT any specific carrier approval--and then MS sold it, completely unlocked, to any and all takers--completely OUTSIDE the carriers themselves.

So here we have a 950XL--this is the 950XL forum after all, and the 950XL was never sold by any US carriers--950XL that never touched the carriers--and we're allowed to put the SIM card in and use it on those carriers, any and all of them with which it is compatible with regard to the frequencies and standards for which it was created.

So why does the 950XL SUDDENLY require "carrier approval" to do something that MS did originally WITHOUT carrier approval?

You keep mentioning AT&T. I never said "a phone locked to AT&T". YOU did. This is a Windows forum, and this subforum is specifically 950XL--which was never sold by AT&T. 950 is sold by AT&T as an AT&T phone; head over to the 950 subforum to talk about that one. Let's stick with the 950XL here, a phone which was NEVER SOLD BY A CARRIER IN THE US.

So tell us all, why suddenly a phone that was never sold by a carrier in the US, which was designed and built without any carrier input whatsoever, suddenly demands carrier approval "because you're mucking with the antenna" when the silly antenna and radio firmware was originally designed AND RELEASED without the carriers AT ALL?

I think you're crazy for holding on to this argument that "you don't have the firmware yet because it requires carrier approval". No, it doesn't. It didn't to begin with, and this is no different.

And in the meantime, users are held hostage to broken features that the firmware will fix--if only MS would release it to end users the same way they released the phone to end users, without carrier involvement.

the phone was created, and its firmware was created, originally WITHOUT any specific carrier approval--and then MS sold it, completely unlocked, to any and all takers--completely OUTSIDE the carriers themselves.

So here we have a 950XL--this is the 950XL forum after all, and the 950XL was never sold by any US carriers--950XL that never touched the carriers--and we're allowed to put the SIM card in and use it on those carriers, any and all of them with which it is compatible with regard to the frequencies and standards for which it was created.

So why does the 950XL SUDDENLY require "carrier approval" to do something that MS did originally WITHOUT carrier approval?

You keep mentioning AT&T. I never said "a phone locked to AT&T". YOU did. This is a Windows forum, and this subforum is specifically 950XL--which was never sold by AT&T. 950 is sold by AT&T as an AT&T phone; head over to the 950 subforum to talk about that one. Let's stick with the 950XL here, a phone which was NEVER SOLD BY A CARRIER IN THE US.

So tell us all, why suddenly a phone that was never sold by a carrier in the US, which was designed and built without any carrier input whatsoever, suddenly demands carrier approval "because you're mucking with the antenna" when the silly antenna and radio firmware was originally designed AND RELEASED without the carriers AT ALL?

I think you're crazy for holding on to this argument that "you don't have the firmware yet because it requires carrier approval". No, it doesn't. It didn't to begin with, and this is no different.

And in the meantime, users are held hostage to broken features that the firmware will fix--if only MS would release it to end users the same way they released the phone to end users, without carrier involvement.

You are confusing technical arguments with contractual and/or PR-related ones. There is almost certainly verbiage in the contract between AT&T and MS for the carriage of the 950's that any radio-affecting firmware updates will need to be validated in some way by AT&T before they are released on AT&T-locked phones. I would be shocked if this was not the case. That would only directly apply to 950's of course, but by extension the U.S. market 950XL's since they are in the same market and MS would not want to update one and not the other in the U.S. if possible. IMHO this is the most likely explanation of the extremely slow rollout of the firmware...they are buying time for AT&T to do their validation and using other markets as beta testers to some degree for the U.S. phones.

You are confusing technical arguments with contractual and/or PR-related ones. There is almost certainly verbiage in the contract between AT&T and MS for the carriage of the 950's that any radio-affecting firmware updates will need to be validated in some way by AT&T before they are released on AT&T-locked phones. I would be shocked if this was not the case. That would only directly apply to 950's of course, but by extension the U.S. market 950XL's since they are in the same market and MS would not want to update one and not the other in the U.S. if possible. IMHO this is the most likely explanation of the extremely slow rollout of the firmware...they are buying time for AT&T to do their validation and using other markets as beta testers to some degree for the U.S. phones.

So I'm right in that MS can certainly update the firmware of the 950XL without any carrier approval.

But if MS has chosen a political reason to deny such updates to non-AT&T users, that's just the final nail in the "unlocked MS phone" coffin as far as I'm concerned.

I'm on an "unlocked" 950 XL from MS running on AT&T and haven't gotten the update, even with the AT&T pulled. I'm thinking of trying to pull the sim, then resetting to factory, then using WDRT to get the new firmware, then trying to reconnect with AT&T.

In the past, with my 1520, I was able to get Denim many, many months before AT&T approved it. It took some momentary inconvenience with AT&T customer service to sort of manually re-register my 1520 but it worked fine afterwards. So I suspect the new firmware upgrade is possible but that MS is actively suppressing it right now. None of this is unknowable if MS would just come clean, instead of subjecting motivated early-adopters to this needless and counter-productive uncertainty. They owe us better than this. Better than vague assurances before we bought and more than the infuriating silence or non-denial denials that are floating around in the ether. I'm willing to go through the paces and hope MS and AT&T will collectively have the corporate decency to look the other way and allow a workaround. How many of us are out there? If we're this willing, we're also good sources of early feedback and telemetry.

I'm on an "unlocked" 950 XL from MS running on AT&T and haven't gotten the update, even with the AT&T pulled. I'm thinking of trying to pull the sim, then resetting to factory, then using WDRT to get the new firmware, then trying to reconnect with AT&T.

Won't do you any good as the new firmware is not available on WDRT for the U.S. 950XL yet. But I share your sentiment. I'll also add that insiders should have the option to get the firmware day 1 on unlocked devices regardless of region IMHO.

My father has 950 and he got it. I have xl and nothing for me yet. We got the same carrier, bought it from the same store.

Similar as window10 upgrading back in July. Some how luck or random. Plus they might just push things in batches.
Even though eryone is anxious, patience will always leads the way of most gain.
BTW, anyone from Canada get it yet on either phone?

It's interesting how, when I ask specific questions about this, those who claimed "these are the facts, firmware update always requires carrier approval" have disappeared from the discussion.

I really do not understand how this can be complicated or contentious. It is pretty simple. But some people are replying to you with answers mentioning the AT&T 950, which is obviously is a different boat since it's a carrier-locked device (like the person who mentioned contract/legal language.) A carrier-locked phone, the AT&T Lumia 950, is probably going to require carrier approval for a firmware update, contractually, of course.

The Lumia 950XL is not a carrier-locked phone, and I disagree with those who suggest such a device would need more carrier approvals for the firmware since it's "universal." Unlocked phones don't need carrier approvals for any updates. That is not to say, however, that Microsoft might not choose to ask carriers to test or vet updates including firmware for them, especially if we're talking about support for things like VoLTE. (And maybe it's true, as was suggested, that Microsoft chooses to test firmware/radio-updates for unlocked devices against multiple carriers and this takes longer. But we really have no way to know.)

The fact is, we have no idea what the (so far, pretty short) delay is in getting the firmware update out to U.S. Lumia 950XLs. XLs outside the US have gotten the firmware, and Microsoft is probably just either doing further testing or phasing it in slowly for other reasons. I really do not see this phase-in period as any reason to be up-in-arms, as the XLs have gotten several OS updates so far which is an incredibly rapid pace compared with the past.

I'm sure in the coming weeks the situation with the firmware update for US 950XLs will shake out.

The Lumia 950XL is not a carrier-locked phone, and I disagree with those who suggest such a device would need more carrier approvals for the firmware since it's "universal." Unlocked phones don't need carrier approvals for any updates. That is not to say, however, that Microsoft might not choose to ask carriers to test or vet updates including firmware for them, especially if we're talking about support for things like VoLTE. (And maybe it's true, as was suggested, that Microsoft chooses to test firmware/radio-updates for unlocked devices against multiple carriers and this takes longer. But we really have no way to know.)
.

Not sure how it could not be imagined that a unlocked phone on a specific carrier could be prevented from getting a "universal" firmware. Update system doesn't have to be completely MS or completely carrier driven/controlled. Could be the firmware update checks acknowledge/respect the carrier the phone is on. This is really not different then how we could all have Windows 10, but different builds, and still have a relatively common "Store" for app updates. ATT and carriers being prime example of using MS Store to distribute/update ATT specific apps through the store.

If more excited to test this theory, I would pull my ATT sim and do a hard reset and then setup on wifi only (not carrier) as then I should get the firmware update if it was carrier specific control of the approval of the new firmware. Unless of course firmware updates will download via WIFI but only once there is a active SIM with data service on a carrier that it uses to gauge the carrier you are on in determining the firmware your receive.

Not sure how it could not be imagined that a unlocked phone on a specific carrier could be prevented from getting a "universal" firmware. Update system doesn't have to be completely MS or completely carrier driven/controlled. Could be the firmware update checks acknowledge/respect the carrier the phone is on. This is really not different then how we could all have Windows 10, but different builds, and still have a relatively common "Store" for app updates. ATT and carriers being prime example of using MS Store to distribute/update ATT specific apps through the store.

I mean, sure, there is a possible universe where Microsoft detects the network the SIM in the phone is registered to and uses that to determine whether or not to push an update. As opposed just the IMEI of the device being registered in their database as locked to a particular carrier. (I seriously doubt it as there has been no evidence of that behavior in the past, but, I can't prove it doesn't happen. Phones have a carrier setting built into them, however, and you can find yours in the About screen on any Windows Phone. This doesn't change no matter what network the phone is registered to. Moreover, the dual-sim 950XL would have to obey a more-restrictive-of-both-networks logic in your scenario, I suppose?)

I am fairly certain that the carrier section of the App Store is handled by IMEI or the carrier setting in the phone as well, and is not dependent on the SIM/network the phone is registered to.

Lastly, it seems like you can now get the XL firmware update with the Windows Device Recovery Tool, suggesting that it can't be too important for them to keep people on US carriers off of that firmware.